/ 



8 1* E E C H 



ION. JAMES L. POGII, OF ALABAMA, 



ELECTION OF SPEAKER. 



DELIVERED IN THE HOUSE OF KEPRESENTATIVES, JANUARY 11, ISGO. 



The organization of the House being under consideration, Mr. PUGH said: 

Mr. Clerk: It was not my intention to address the House upon any question 
involved in its organization, but, as the whole field of politics has been thrown 
open, I feel that 1 owe it to my constituents to join in the discussion; and, in 
doing so, shall address myself to three propositions. 1. The present condition 
of public opinion as to the real character of our Federal system ; 2. The basis 
and motive of that opinion ; and 3. The remedy for the evils which have im- 
paired the integrity of the Government, and now threaten the subversion of the 
Constitution. Preliminary to the argument, I will say it is my solemn convic- 
tion that no amount of ellort, however well directed and praiseworthy, can ever 
rescue the Constitution from the perils which surround it, or restore the Govern- 
ment to its original parity, and perpetuate it in that form. 

The elements entering into our political combination are so complicated and 
discordant that human infirmity will never allow them to coexist in safety and 
harmony. No man who deals justly with himself can close his eyes to the an- 
tagonism, organic and vital, apparent in every motion of our Federal machinery. 
True, we hear daily professions of fidelity to the Constitution. From the re- 
motest stand-points of diflerence we hear loud disclaimers of all purpose hostile 
to the South and her State institutions. And yet, who fails to see here, at this 
very hour, that our constituticnial machinery is stationary, because the two sec- 
tions North and South are endeavoring to move it in opposite directions? Who 
so ignorant as to have escaped the fact that the Constitution, by diflerence of 
construction in the two seciious, is made to establish governments wholly un- 
like in character and powers, with rights and guarantees recognized in one 
which are denied and repudiated in the other. 

The northern theory is, that the Constitution of the United States is the off- 
spring of the numerical power of the whole people, regarded as one political 
community. This radical error is the source of many others equally mischiev- 
ous. That there is personal responsibility for every right, privilege, and institu- 
tion, rocognized or tolerated in our political system; and, if wrong in morals or 
politics, duty demands individual and associated action to rectify or destroy. 
Also, that individual allegiance to the State is merged in the general mass of 
allegiance to the central Government. Also, that the powers of Congress were 
not delegated but surrendered, abandoned, by the States, and consolidated in 

Printed by Lemuel Towers. 



the supreme head. Plence, that the Government is not Federal, hut national; 
and that parties, patriotism, and allegiance are national. Also, that the jeople 
of every State and section are hornog-eneous, with harmonious interests and pur- 
suits; and, if homogeneous with harmonious interests and pursuits, it is claimed, 
that the power of ultimate decision, sovereignty, resides with the general mass. 
Also, that the popular will of this general mass should preside over the action 
of the Government, and determine what is the general welfare, and what powers 
exi«t to promote it. Such is the poliiical philosophy of those who strike down 
St e sovereignty and State rights, and whose aim is the abolition of slavery, and 
tht establishment of northern supremacy. 

; . opposition to this theory, the South contends that the Constitution is the 
result of the concurrent action of the people of each State by virtue of their sov- 
ereignty and independence; that it passed the ordeal of nine State conventions, 
each of which had absolute, unrestrained jurisdiction over the question of its 
adoption or rejection, and the consequent life or death of the Constitution. The 
Constitution is the otispring of thirteen concurrent sovereignties. Its distinctive 
characteristics and main excellence consists in the checking power of minori- 
ties. The concurrence of separate, independent majorities in producing results 
is the predicate of the whol-ri system of checks and balances, and imparts to the 
Eepublic all its elasticity and power of expansion. We find analogies to sup- 
port this system in the productions and laws of nature. In the vegetab^« king- 
dom, each tree and flower exert their power of absorption u])ou surrounding 
nutriment and moisture, and those not occupying a proper relaiion to ueighbor- 
ing vegetation droop and die. Li the solar system we have a sublime exhibi- 
tion of counter action producing uninterrujiied liarmony. Wherever we dis- 
cover elements or animals in combination, nature has provided the means of 
preventing conflict or resisting encroachments. 

In theory^ every interest of the people finds a representative in some one of 
the Departments of Government, and the concurrence of that representative is 
required in all legislation aft'ectiug that interest. So that in case there is con- 
flict, protection is expected from the checking power of the representative. As 
all letT'islation must have the sanction of the several majoiities entering into the 
law-making power, it was thought that no one interest could be fostered to the 
prejudice of another, but that all would receive equal benefit and protection. 
This indemnity against encroachment proceeds from the right of making choice 
of agents existing in a majority of those of like interest. Similarity of interest 
is the source, and the ballot-box the channel of the power which was intended 
to aflbrd security to the citizen, county, State, and section. 

The Federal arrangement did not result in the creation of a separate Govern- 
ment with independent being and powers, but only in the readjustment of the 
organism which had proved imperfect under the old Articles of Confederation. 

It will be conceded that the Federal Government has no powers incident to 
its own being. Its powers are not inherent, self-existing, but are derived, dele- 
gated, not for its own purposes, but in trust for the benefit of the States. Hence, 
the true relation between the States and the Federal Government is that of 
principal and agent, the two being coordinate when possessing like powers, and 
each supreme in the rightful use of the powers not possessed by the other in 
their relation. The distinction is between the constitution-making power and 
the law-making power. The one possesses original, inherent life itself. The 
other is a mere custodian of power, a creature with a borrowed existence. The 
former creates; the latter exercises power. The one is always principal in that 
it creates; the other coordinate, and in some cases supreme, iu the mere exercise 
of power. Sovereignty resides exclusively iu the constitution-making power. 
Its essence consists solely in the fact that there can be no limitation upon its 
exercise. Sovereignty is the " unrestrained supreme power of ultimate decision." 
And it is impossible for such a power to coexist in two branches of the same 






=^ 



organism. Under our system, soverei'cfnty cannot reside in any law-making 
power, for the reason that the hiw-malciiii; power is derived, delegated, and sov- 
ereignty is necessarily a unit, inherent and indivisible. Any agent or creature 
may i^xercise sovereign power; but the delegation of the power does not carry 
that, which alone preserves the relation of principal and agent; neither can it 
destroy the power of revocation in the principal. 

Sovereignty and allegiance are inseparable. The constitution-making power 
is entitled to the unlimited allegiance of the citizen ; and the law-making 
t^ power, rightfully exercised, is entitled to the obedience of the citizen. 

l£ The wliole argument comes to tins: That the essence of our entire system of 

Government is embraced in the just and equitable idea that it is a compact 
among coequal sovereigns for the mutual benefit of all. It is founded in 
trust and cunfidence. llonesly of action, uprightness of purpose, justice and 
good faith, are as necL-ssary to its being as food, light, and air are indispensable 
to animal existence. 

These are the hi)stile governments which the two sections are endeavoring to 
administer and perpetuate under one Constitution. 

The framers of our Government encountered the greatest trouble in the ad- 
justment of the delegated and reserved powers. Some feared tliat the Federal 
Government, by unauthorized construction, would so enlarge and consolidate its 
powers as to overshadow the several State governments — ultimately usurp all 
the reserved powers, and build up an oppressive centralism. Others thought 
the Federal Government would be too weak to protect itself afjainst the ab- 
sorption of its powers by the States. That the States united against it in any 
claim of power, would always defeat its exercise. And in case there was con- 
flict between the two it was thought the States would sustain each other, and 
thus in the end strip the Government of its powers, or so cripple their exercise 
as to reduce it to a mere skeleton. Althoue:h such fears were reasonable, yet 
experience has taught us that the greatest danger is to be apprehended from a 
different combination. There is no conflict between the Federal Government 
and the States united in vindication of their sovereignty and reserved rights. 
The scramble is between the States themselves to get possession of the Federal 
Government, to establish and enforce the respective theories I have indicated as 
obtaining in the two sections. If the majority section demands legislation to 
promote its interests and purposes, its representatives arrive at the power by 
construction, and in this way State sovereignty and reserved right are united 
with delegated and assumed powers to accomplish a common purpose, and they 
go hand in hand in the work of usurpation and aggression. 

A brief examination into the practiclal workings of these two hostile sys- 
tems must satisfy every honest man, capable of self-government, that northern 
theories and policy have had steady, vigorous development from the becinning ; 
while southern riijhts and equality, southern institutions and civilization have 
been subjected to the most exhausting pressure, and compelled to encounter 
insult and wrong trying to the most Christian forbearance. 

The northern section of the Confederacy is composed of carrying, manu- 
facturing, commercial, and provision States. Their people are fond of domin- 
ion, full of enterprise, possessed of great mechanical genius, remarkable for 
cunning, self confidence and esteem, watchful of little things, devoted to trafic, 
and endowed with wonderful tenacity of purpose. 

The great value of this Government to these people is to legalize monopoly, 
regulate stocks and currency, open commercial highways, encourage a liberal 
system of bounty legislation at the expense of their confederates, and exercise 
general supervision over their plantation States at the South ; reforming the 
moral, social, and political evils encouraged by their southern tenantry. 

These people are all the time clamonous for Government aid in their business 
and pursuits. The carrying States must enjoy a monopoly in coastwise naviga- 



tion ; and it is secured by legislation, which has drained the South for over forty 
years. The manufactuvino; States want protection against foreign rivals, and it 
is granted through the revenue policy of the Government. High duties are 
imposed on importations for the specific purpose of excluding the foreign rival 
from our markets, thereby compelling the southern people to buy at increased 
prices at home, or forcing them to pay the duty it' bought abroad and imported. 
In this way, it is a well ascertained fact that the expoitiiig or southern States pay 
about three-fourths of the expenses of the Government, and the northern Stales 
pay one-fourth, while, in the disbursement of this revenue, the South gets one- 
fourth, and the North three-fourths. 

The West demands a Paci tic railroad ; her rivers and harl)ors must be im- 
proved, and the Federal Treasuiy furnishes the material aid. The South derives 
no benefit whatever from any of this legislation ; and yet she is powerless to 
prevent the continuance of this ruinous system of drainage. Tiie East favors 
river and harbor bills for the West to exhaust the revenue, so as to create a 
necessity for higher tariffs. 

For tlie same reason homestead bills are supported. They cut off the ])ublic 
lands as a source of supply to the Federal revenue, and increase the dependence 
upon tariffs. To enable this section to engraft its theories and policy upon the 
Constitution, and thereby insure its foul domination over the South, political 
power becomes the paramount object of patriotic desire. They resort to all 
forms of agitation. They ajipeal to the worst; passions of the masses — the in- 
stincts of self preservation, and self-aggrandizement, love of gain, jealousy of 
rivals in all relations — these, and every other sense or passion, however moibid 
or vicious, likely to influence human action, are cultivated and made useful in 
the great struggle for political supremacy. But the great element of party power, 
the vitalizing, ccntrolling principle in northern politics, the test in Christian 
faith and fellowship, the passport to universal favor and position, is opposition 
to African slavery at the South. 

Mr. Clerk, I shall ofiei' no argument or apology in support of this institution. 
The subject has been fully discussed in all its ramifications, and I will simply 
remark that the system of negro servitude at the South is a blessing in every 
conceivable sense, inestimable to both races, and it can and will survive every 
ordeal except the friction, drainage, and pressure of the Federal Union. No 
wonder the Black Republican cry is, "the Federal Union, it must and shall be 
preserved." No wonder this proclamation is reechoed by the Union meetings 
at the North. The Union is the coil of the anaconda to the institution of 
slavery. Gentlemen may talk to me about rolling back the tide of abolition 
sentiment at the North. They may assure me that the Black Republican pha- 
lanx is broken. They may tell me to listen to the thunder-tramp of millions 
marching to the rescre of the Constitution. But I beg my countryinen not to 
be deceived. This promise of a healthy reaction at the North has been rung in 
our ears for a quarter of a century. We have been often assured that abolition 
power had culminated; that the Union was too valuable to the North for her 
people to encourage any scheme that would imperil its existence, that the true 
policy of the South was conciliation, moderation, and conservatism. We have 
believed, trusted to leaders, and relied on parties. These failing, we have 
threatened and submitted — then resolved resistance, and submitted again. 
We have tried threats, remonstrance, compromises, exhausted the virtue of 
psalm-singing to the Union, its sacredness, it glories, its prestige; and I inquire 
of the Union sentinels, " Watchmen, what of the night?" The response is, 
" Rather dark to see clearly ; somewhat threatening at' the North ; but we have 
great confidence that these appearances indicate that the morn, with its bright 
sunlight, will soon dawn upon the country." But what are the facts? The 
Abolition organization has increased with amazing rapidity, become more intole- 
rant, bolder in the announcement of its purposes, more daring in their execu- 



X 



tion; and yet it has marclierl straight forward, "con queri no: and to conquer,' 
until to-day it is triumphant in sixteen States. It has one hundred and twelve 
members npon this Hoor ; and with that unity of action and steadiness of pur- 
pose which have always characterized them, they demand possession and con- 
trol of the popular branch of this Government. 

This being the present status of the Black Republican party in the Union, 
what are its future purposes and policy in reference to slavery ? Honorable 
members on the other side of the House complain that their party principles 
and purposes are misrepresented. They admit the fugitive slave law has been 
violated in some instances, and the right of recapture publicly denied and re- 
sisted. They admit that war upon slavery in the States is justified and declared 
by some. It is not denied that lirowu and Helper have indorsers of all their 
wicked purposes. But say thev, the party is not responsible for such doctrine 
and excesses. These individual members'of the party, it is contended, are under 
the lead of Garrison, Phillip?, and Giddings, misguided and imprudent men, 
who are not true exponents of the partv creed. I have no doubt that Garrison, 
Phillips, Giddings, and their followers, fully understand that the ultimate aims 
of the dominant partv harmonize with their wishes. 

But, waiving the inquiry whether these conqilaints are well-founded, T will 
try this party by principles and purposes which none of its representatives can 
disown and survive. 

Is there a man of you. Representative or voter, who is not opposed to the ex- 
tension of slavery into the Territories? Are you not in favor of its exclusion 
from territory where soil, climate and productions invite the institution and 
would make it profitable ? Are you in favor of the continued existence of 
slavery in the District of Columbia ? Are you in favor of wiping from north- 
ern statutes all legislation offensive and embarrassing to the right of recapture? 
And will you publicly condemn resistance to the fugitive slave law, and advise 
acquiescence in its execution ? These are plain questions, and I apprehend there 
can be no dispute about the answers. Then, upon wliat ground do you justify 
your action ? It is upon the sole ground that slavery is a great social, moral, 
and political wrong. Now, why is it that you do not extend your war upon 
slavery into the States? In the abstract you are an enemy of the institution 
wherever it exists. Then, the only reason why you stop at State lines, is the 
want of constitutional power to strike down tlie institution in the States. And 
I call attention to the fact that the "irrepressible-conflict" doctrine was inaugur- 
ated for the purpose of supplying the want of constitutional authority in Con- 
gress to abolish slavery in the States. How do I prove it? The gravament of 
Mr. Seward's Rochester speech is, that white and black labor are in irrecon- 
cilable conflict, and that one or the other is bound to be supplanted. No sano 
man can be serious in maintaining the proposition that slavery will, or can be, 
reestablished in New England. Then, what was the real design in annovincing 
the irrepressible conflict? It was to reach the non-slaveholder of the South. 
He was the white labor to be disaftected. He must be indoctrinated with tlie 
idea that his labor and the labor of the slave are in ruinous conflict ; that one 
or the other system of labor must go down and pass away, giving to the other 
system exclusive employment. 

In this connection you also discover the purposes of the Helper book. Some 
of its indorsers say they do not approve anything in that publication intended 
to produce insurrection, or in any way to set the slave upon his master. But I 
ask those members if their object was not to convince the non-slaveholder 
at the South that his condition as a white laborer would be vastly improved by 
the absence of slavery from the States ? Do you not sanction everything in 
that book which depreciates slave labor when contrasted with white labor? 
That teaches white labor that it is more productive and profitable where there 
is no slave labor ? That teaches the white laborer that his association with Af- 



6 ' 

ricans is degrading and demoralizing? And ^vben you attempt to reeducate 
him, is it not your hope that you will lay the predicate for an anti-slavery 
organization in the southern States, which will ultimately strike down slavery 
there by changing the State constitutions ? And if this is not your ohject, are 
you not aiming to prepare the noji-slavebolder at the South to sanction an 
alteration of the Federal Constitution when you are ready for such action 1 

The South, then, is to have no more expansion ; but, surrounded by hostile 
confederates, she is doomed' to the perpetual annoyance, insult, and ruinous 
pressure of the irrepressible conflict, attended by robbery, Brown raids, periodi- 
cal insurrection, and the utter banishment of all domestic peace and tranquility 
fiom Ijer borders? 

Then, where is the safety of the South ? Is it in national party orgarizations ? 
I am free to confess that no party with ]>rine,ipk^s coextensive with the Union 
of these States will ever be formed hereafter embodying more fidelity to the 
constitutional rights and equality of the South than the Democratic party. 
But while that" party is geographically natioiKil in principle and purpose, 
yet it is sectional in ability and ])Ower. At the North it is broken into frag- 
ments. There is no unity in reference to the true character of our Gov-- 
ernment. There is disagreement as to the powers of Congress upon vital 
issues. The Democracy of the South is invited to cooperate with the Democ- 
racy of the North upon condition that both sections are permitted to occupy 
conflicting positions on territorial rights and policy. We have been struggling 
for fifteen years to find a satisfactory and permanent solution of territorial gov- 
ernment. Tlie South has insisted that when the Federal Government acquires 
and goes into possession of territory, she holds it in trust for the joint and equal 
benefit of the people of each State who conferred the power to acquire. That 
the Government is a mere naked trustee, uncoupled with an interest, and the 
people of the States the sole beneficiaries. That the object of the acquisition 
was to make new States; and that, in training and qualifying others for admis- 
sion into the partnership, the rights and relative position of each member of the 
firm should be consulted and respected. That, as a just, unavoidable, logical 
sequence, the people of each State have the right to be placed on terms of per- 
fect equality in the occupancy of the territory, and its preparation for the 
attributes, dignity, and power of a sovereign. That when that condition is 
reached by the Territory, the States, through their agent. Congress, consent 
that the people of the Territory may meet in convention to frame a government 
for themselves. That when so organized, the sovereignty of the people of the 
States devolves upon the convention, and perfects its constitution-making power ; 
the only limitation upon which is, that the State constitution shall be republican 
in form. That it would be a gross breach of trust, and a violation of the funda- 
mental principles of the compact, for Congress, or its sub-agent, a Territorial 
Legislature, to pass any law which divests or impaiis the equal right of joint 
occupancy. And that the duty is inseparable fi'om the power of the trustee so 
to hold the trust property as that all the beneficiaries shall have full, free, and 
healthy enjoyment of the common property. That if, by non-action or positive 
legislation, Congress or the Territorial Legislature exposes property in slaves to 
a^y hazard or embarrassment, to that extent the right of joint emigration and 
occupancy of the slaveholder is impaired, and the Constitution violated. These 
just, equitable, and constitulional demands of the South were denied by all the 
Black Rei)ublicans, and the power and duty claimed in Congress to exclude the 
slaveholder by positive law. 

A large portion of the northern Democracy, headed by a great and powerful 
leader, deny the right of joint occu})ancy of the Territory with slave property 
against the will of a majority of the inhabitants, as expressed through their 
Territorial Legislature. At the instance of Mr. I)ouglas, the question of the 
power of Congress to legislate slavery into or out of a State or Territory w£is 



I 



^vhoI]y witlnlrawn from Congress, and referred to the people of tlie Territory to 
decide for tLems«]ves, precisely in the mode, time, and manner they had the 
amhority to do under the Constitution; and what power, and how much, a 
Territorial Legislature has, was submitted to the Supreme Court of the United 
States, That august tribunal has rendered a decision which, according- to 
southern constru('^fion, covers all the issues, and recognizes every right and 
principle for which the South has ever contended. And is it not a just ground 
of complaint that the very man who proposed this mode of settling this vexed 

" question should be among the first to join issue with the South on the im- 
puit and meaning of that decision, and to suggest to her enemies in the Terri- 
tories that, by non-action or unfriendly legislation, they may destroy the benefit 
to the South of any decision of the Supreme Court. All we now ask is, that 
the award of the arbitrator, well defined and understood, shall be incorporated 
into the platform of the parties to the reference — the northern and southern 
Democracy — and made the basis of the future government of the Territoiies. 
Is the South so dispirited, humbled, and worn by the stiuggle as to demand or 
acoepi. less? Shall we, in deference to the anti-slavery sentiment of the North, 
yield or ignore vital principles, and consent that the Democratic party shall go 
"before thcT country upon a platform which amalgamates hostile elements, opin- 
ions, and principles ? Is a victory obtained by double-dealing and bad faith 
worth anything? 

I know it is^insisted that these are dead issues — lifeless abstractions, because 
there is no territory suited to souihern institutions. For the same reason, the 
p)Ower of Congress' to prohibit slaveiy — or the Wilmot proviso — is, and has 
been, withoutpractical importance or vitality. And well do I remember the 
volume of condemnation which was poured upon the Whig party in 1852 for 
ignoring Congressional power over slavery in the same Territoiies now possessed 
by the Government. If the Charleston cunventiou follows this example of hid- 

i ing out great principles which. aie assailed, or invites us to the support of any 
man who denies the southern construction of the Cincinnati platform and the 
Dred Scott decision, then the southern Democracy will stultify themselves, and 
fatally impair the integrity of their party organization by giving hinr support. 
If, with the character of the Govenment'-well defined, and the rights and privi- 
leges of the parties to the compact clearly asserted by the Democratic party, 
the Black Republicans get possession of the Government, then the question is 
fully presented, whether the southern States will remain in the Union, as sub- 
ject and degraded colonies, or will they withdraw, and establish a southern con- 
federacy of coequal homogeneous sovereigns ? 

In my judgment, the latter is the only course compatible with the honor, 
equality, and "safety of the South ; and the sooner it is known and acted upon the 
' better for all parties to the compact. 

] There is no value in the checking power of minorities, when selfishness, bad 
faith, and reckless construction break over constitutional limitations and guar- 
antees. 

V The truest conservatism and wisest statesmanship demand a speedy termina- 

t\m>of all association with such confederates, and the formation of another union 

of 9ates, homogeneous in population, institutions, interests, and pursuits. Such 

a c ifederacy would be imperishable, and present to the world a contented, 

tavy, prosperous, powerful people in the enjoyment of the highest perfection of 

civlzatioQ ai-i free government. 



I IBRftRY OF CONGRESS 



> I 



y 



LIBRARY OF CONGRESS 



011 898 350 6 



HOLLINGER 
pH 8.5 

MILL RUN F3-1543 



